The Coso Artifact

Mystery from the Depths of Time

Introduction

reationists have often been
criticized for failing to present original research and
evidence that would overthrow our contemporary view of
human origins in favor of another. However, this is not an
entirely fair accusation. The creation "science" field
known as OOPARTS, or "Out Of Place ARTifactS" is a lively
area of study with numerous examples. This paper will
examine the most popular and least understood specimen, the
Coso Artifact.

The Discovery

The story of the Coso Artifact has been embellished over
the years, but nearly all accounts of the actual discovery
are basically unchanged.

Â

Figure 1
The original artifact sliced in two

On February 13, 1961, Wallace Lane, Virginia Maxey, and
Mike Mikesell were seeking interesting mineral specimens,
particularly geodes, for their "LM & V Rockhounds Gem
and Gift Shop" in Olancha, California. On this particular
day, the trio were about six miles northeast of Olancha,
near the top of a peak about 4,300 feet in elevation and
about 340 feet above the dry bed of Owens Lake. According
to Maxey, "We hiked about three miles north, after we had
parked some five miles east of State Highway 395, south of
Olancha, California." At lunchtime, after collecting rocks
most of the morning, all three placed their specimens in
the rock sack Mikesell was carrying.

The next day in the gift shop's workroom, Mikesell
ruined a nearly new diamond saw blade while cutting what he
thought was a geode. Inside the nodule that was cut,
Mikesell did not find a cavity as so many geodes have, but
a perfectly circular section of very hard, white material
that appeared to be porcelain. In the center of the
porcelain cylinder, was a 2-millimeter shaft of bright
metal. The metal shaft responded to a magnet.

There were still other odd qualities about the specimen.
The outer layer of the specimen was encrusted with fossil
shells and their fragments. In addition to shells, the
discoverers noticed two nonmagnetic metallic metal objects
in the crust, resembling a nail and a washer. Stranger
still, the inner layer was hexagonal and seemed to form a
casing around the hard porcelain cylinder. Within the inner
layer, a layer of decomposing copper surrounded the
porcelain cylinder.

The Initial Investigations

Figure 2
X-ray of the Coso artifact.

Very little is known about the initial physical
inspections of the artifact. According to discoverer
Virginia Maxey, a geologist she spoke with who examined the
fossil shells encrusting the specimen said the nodule had
taken at least 500,000 years to attain its present form.
However, the identity of the first geologist is still a
mystery, and his findings were never officially
published.

Another investigation was conducted by creationist Ron
Calais. Calais is the only other individual known to have
physically inspected the artifact, and was allowed to take
photographs of the nodule in both X ray and natural light.
Calais's X-rays brought interest in the artifact to a new
level. The X-ray of the upper end of the object seemed to
reveal some sort of tiny spring or helix. INFO Journal
Publisher Ronald J. Willis speculated that it could
actually be "the remains of a corroded piece of metal with
threads." The other half of the artifact revealed a sheath
of metal, presumably copper, covering the porcelain
cylinder.

The Artifact: Where Is It
Now?

The last known individual to possess the Coso Artifact
was one of the original discoverers, Wallace Lane.
According to the Spring 1969 issue of INFO Journal, Lane
was the last known person to possess the object. It was on
display in his home, but he adamantly refused to allow
anyone to examine it. However, he had a standing offer to
sell it for $25,000. In September 1999, a national search
was attempted to locate any of the original discoverers,
but the attempt was fruitless. The authors of this article
suspect that Wallace Lane is dead, and the location of the
artifact is unknown, possibly destroyed. Virginia Maxey is
alive, but is avoiding any public comment. The whereabouts
of Mike Mikesell are still unknown.

Fantastic Speculations

Ever since the artifact was first discovered, numerous
individuals have speculated about its mysterious origin and
possible use.

Virginia Maxey speculated that "one possibility is that
it is barely 100 years old - something that lay in a mud
bed, then got baked and hardened by the sun in a matter of
a few years." However it was Maxey who supplied the claim
that the artifact could be at least 500,000 years old. "Or
else it is an instrument as old as legendary Mu or
Atlantis. Perhaps it is a communications device or some
sort of directional finder or some instrument made to
utilize power principles we know nothing about."

INFO Journal editor Paul J. Willis speculated that the
artifact was some sort of spark plug. His brother found the
suggestion extraordinary. "I was thunderstruck," he wrote,
"for suddenly all the parts seemed to fit. The object
sliced in two shows a hexagonal part, a porcelain or
ceramic insulator with a central metallic shaft - the basic
components of any spark plug." However, the two could not
reconcile the upper end featuring a "spring", "helix", or
"metal threads" with any contemporary spark plug. So the
mystery continued. The artifact even appeared briefly at
the end of an "In Search Of..." episode hosted by Leonard
Nimoy.

The Internet offers a plethora of other opinions on the
subject. While most websites simply report the mystery as
described earlier, some have taken to speculate on the
purpose and origin of such a device. Brian Wood, described
as "International Director of MICAP (Multinational
Investigations Cooperative on Aerial Phenomena) and
Producer/Director of The Paranet Continuum Radio Program"
suggested that if it isn't simply a spark plug, "My guess
would be some sort of antenna. The construction reminds me
of modern attempts at superconductors. Wonder if anyone's
tried replicating the thing using ceramic superconductors
and then cooling the thing off with liquid nitrogen to see
what happens." (Source: http://www.mm2000.nu/sphinxt.html
September 10, 1999).

Joe Held's "Joe's UFOs and Space Mysteries" thinks the
device "looks similar to a small capacitor with several
different materials. The object is roughly the size of an
auto spark plug. Since the formation of geodes can take
millions of years this was a very curious find indeed."
(Source: http://members.tripod.com/J_Kidd/index.html
September 10, 1999).

The Creationists and the
Artifact

With such outrageous speculation, individuals familiar
with the creation/evolution controversy would assume that
fundamentalist Christians would stay far away from such
artifacts and stories. But this is far from the case.
Numerous creationists have been involved with this artifact
since its discovery.

As noted earlier, Ron Calais was involved with the Coso
Artifact since its initial discovery. Calais was the
individual responsible for the natural light and X-ray
photographs of the artifact. He also brought the Coso
Artifact to the attention of the Charles Fort Society,
publisher of INFO Journal, whose 1969 article is the
primary source for information on this object to date.
Calais is still a contributor to creationism and most
recently had a paper published in the June 1996 edition of
the Creation Research Society Quarterly ("Slippery
Phylogenies: Evolutionary Speculations on the Origin of
Frogs", by Ron Calais and A.W. Mehlert, pp. 44-48.).

Creation Outreach, a Spokane, Washington based
creationism ministry promotes the artifact on their website
(source:
http://home.att.net/~creationoutreach/pages/strange.htm
September 22, 1999) by reprinting an article by J.R.
Jochmans. Jochman's article on the Creation Outreach's
website, originally available through the national
Bible-Science Association concluded, "As a whole, the 'Coso
artifact' is now believed to be something more than a piece
of machinery: The carefully shaped ceramic, metallic shaft
and copper components hint at some form of electrical
instrument. The closest modern apparatus that researchers
have been able to equate it with is a spark plug. However,
there are certain features - particularly the spring or
helix terminal - that does [sic] not correspond to any
known spark plug today."
Creation Outreach member Jim Marisch is known to have
lectured in local Spokane public school classrooms
, but it is unknown if he specifically mentioned
the artifact in question. Nevertheless, students exposed to
Creation Outreach would inevitably be redirected to their
website
for further information.

It should also be noted that according to a letter
printed in "Atlantis Arising", J.R. Jochmans claims to have
ghost-written three quarters of the book "Secrets of the
Lost Races" by Rene Noorbergen. "Secrets of the Lost Races"
has often been cited as a reference for the Coso Artifact
by young-earth creationists.

Carl Baugh, a young-earth creationist whose claim to
fame is the promotion of the Paluxy River Tracks, notes the
Coso Artifact in his online dissertation (source: http://home.texoma.net/~linesden/cem/diss/diss2.htm
October 10, 1999) using material from Noorbergen's "Secrets
of the Lost Races."

Elsewhere in the Pacific Northwest, the Institute for
Creation Research has been heavily promoting the Coso
Artifact through its adjunct faculty member, Dr. Donald
Chittick. According to his own literature, Chittick, a
Newberg, Oregon resident, holds a Ph.D. in physical
chemistry and has taught at the University of Puget Sound
and George Fox College. Dr. Chittick is also an active
lecturer, having traveled in the United State and Canada
for the past 20 years, speaking before students both public
and private about creationism. In 1981, he was one of five
"creation scientists" who testified in pretrial depositions
for the Arkansas "Balanced Treatment Act", which required
that "creation science" be taught along with evolutionary
biology in that state's public schools. And in 1993, his
lecture to public high school students in Stanwood,
Washington led to a
community furor, threats from the ACLU, and a subsequent
shakeup in the local school board.

Though he claims to have little to do with the ICR, Dr.
Chittick encourages audiences at his lectures to join the
ICR, sells their literature, and signs up interested
parties for the ICR's mailing list. Most recently, Donald
Chittick delivered his "Puzzle of Ancient Man" lecture on
March 9, 1999, in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The event was
sponsored by the ICR as part of their "Case for Creation"
lecture series. According to the ICR, adjunct faculty
members are "expected to be of high moral character and
personal integrity, firmly committed to the ICR Tenets and
Educational Philosophy."

"The Puzzle of Ancient Man" lecture is basically a
summary of
Chittick's book of the same title. Like the book,
Chittick begins his lecture by presenting the Coso Artifact
as evidence that ancient civilizations were extremely
advanced. Presuming that it is an ancient spark plug,
Chittick explains, "A spark plug is evidence of fairly
sophisticated development. Reliable dates for such finds
are difficult to obtain. However, it has been commonly
assumed that formation of geodes requires significant
amounts of time. Finding a spark plug in a rock considered
to be very old would indeed give it the label of an
out-of-place artifact. Evidence of advanced technology,
like spark plugs, should not, according to evolutionism, be
discovered in old rocks."

Problems with the Artifact
Story

Creationist and other proponents of the artifact have
woven a riveting story. But a multitude of problems
regarding the claims and recent discoveries have cast a
much different picture.

The Geologic Evidence: Is the Coso
Artifact Encased in a Geode?

Figure 3
The outer casing surrounding the Coso Artifact.

When it comes to the geologic evidence, the most stunning
claim is that the artifact was discovered in a geode. As
Donald Chittick has noted, formation of a geode requires
significant amounts of time. But what is often overlooked
is that the Coso Artifact possesses no characteristics that
would classify it as a geode. It is true that the original
discoverers were looking for geodes on the day the artifact
was found. But this alone is insufficient evidence that the
artifact is a geode.

Geodes consists of a thin outer shell, composed of dense
chalcedonic silica, and are filled with a layer of quartz
crystals. The Coso Artifact does not possess either
feature. Discoverer Virginia Maxey referred to the material
covering the artifact as "hardened clay" and noted that it
had picked up a miscellaneous collection of pebbles,
including a "nail and washer." Analysis of the surface
material is noted as having a hardness of Mohs 3, which is
not very hard and certainly much softer than
chalcedony.

Other arguments regarding the ancient source of the Coso
Artifact focus on the alleged fossil shells encrusted on
the surface. As noted earlier, if a nail and washer were
also found on the surface, the significance of the fossil
shells is seriously diminished. Even creationist literature
notes how surface materials can lead to mistaken
assumptions about the true age of individual objects.
Creation Ex Nihilo's June-August 1998 issue features fence
wire that had become encased by surface materials including
"fossil" seashells (quotes in the original article).

The Artifact Itself: What Is
It?

As noted earlier, numerous individuals have speculated
about the apparent purpose of the Coso Artifact. The most
popular suggestion is that it is some sort of spark plug,
designed and manufactured by an advanced civilization eons
ago for technological devices equal to or surpassing our
own. But as mentioned earlier, there's no reason to assume
that the artifact was manufactured thousands of years ago.
Some have half-heartedly suggested that the device could
have been a contemporary spark plug circa 1961. But ancient
artifact proponents point to the X-ray of the top half,
which indicates some type of tiny spring or helix
mechanism. The content of this X-ray, they argue, runs
contrary to what we know about contemporary spark
plugs.

A clue to what is revealed in the X-ray lies in one of
the earliest articles about the artifact. In the Spring
1969 issue of INFO Journal, Ronald Willis suggested that
the upper end of the object "is actually the remains of a
corroded piece of metal with threads." The Willis brothers
seriously suspected the object was a contemporary spark
plug, but were still unable to explain what was in the
X-ray. Spark plugs of the 1960's era typically terminated
with no visible threading and tapered to a dull point.

Though many of the interested parties agreed that the
artifact bore a striking resemblance to a twentieth-century
spark plug, no one seems to have considered the idea of
evolution - specifically, spark plug evolution.

In the course of investigating the origins of the Coso
Artifact, it was determined that mining operations were
conducted in the area of discovery early in the twentieth
century. This discovery lead to the tantalizing possibility
that primitive combustion engines were used for various
purposes in the Coso mountain range. Combustion engines
were a very new technology at this time, and so we
extrapolated that spark plug technology would also have
been in its infancy. Even if this assumption were correct,
identification of the spark plug in question would seem to
be a daunting task. To help the authors of this article
identify the Coso Artifact, they decided to turn to a
little-known group of experts - The Spark Plug Collectors
of America.

Letters were sent to four different spark plug
collectors describing the Coso Artifact, including Ron
Calais' X-rays of the object in question. Collectors were
asked if they could identify what they saw in the photos.
The collectors were expected to provide some vague hints,
or to not be able to identify the artifact at all. Their
actual answers were stunning.

On September 9, 1999, Chad Windham, President of the
Spark Plug Collectors of America called Pierre Stromberg of
Pacific Northwest Skeptics. Windham initially suspected
that Stromberg was a fellow spark plug collector, writing
incognito, with the ostensible motive of hoaxing him. His
fears were compounded by the fact that there is an actual
line of spark plugs named "Stromberg." Windham had also
contacted another spark plug collector, strongly suspecting
that he was the culprit, and made a point of looking up the
website of Pacific Northwest Skeptics to ensure it actually
existed.

Though Stromberg repeatedly assured Windham that his
intentions were purely for research, he was puzzled why
Windham was so suspicious and asked him to explain. Windham
replied that it was so obvious to him that the artifact was
a contemporary spark plug, the letter had to be a hoax. "I
knew what it was the moment I saw the x-rays" Windham
stated. He also added that it was not uncommon at all for
spark plug collectors to play pranks on one another.

Stromberg asked Windham if he could identify the
particular make of the spark plug. Windham replied he was
certain that it was a 1920's era Champion spark plug.
Stromberg was stunned by the collector's certainty, but
Windham insisted that he had nailed the identification.
Windham offered to send two identical spark plugs, the only
possible but slight difference being the diameter of the
packing nut at the base of the plug. Stromberg accepted
Windham's offer and a few days later a package arrived in
the mail.

Ten days after the phone call with Windham, Pierre
Stromberg received a phone call from Bill Bond, founder of
the Spark Plug Collectors of America, and curator of a
private museum of spark plugs containing more than two
thousand specimens. Bond said he hadn't spoken to Windham,
but said he thought he knew the identity of the Coso
Artifact, "A 1920s Champion spark plug." Spark plug
collector Mike Healy also concurred with Bond and Windham's
assessment about the spark plug. The fourth collector, Jeff
Bartheld, Vice-President of the Spark Plug Collectors of
America contacted Stromberg via postal mail on October 18,
1999, and also confirmed that the artifact was a 1920s
Champion spark plug. To date, there has been no dissent in
the spark plug collector community as to the origins of the
Coso Artifact.

Since Chad Windham mentioned that spark plug collectors
enjoy pulling pranks on one another, the question of
deliberate fraud inevitably crops up in relation to the
Coso Artifact. However, there is little hard evidence that
the original discoverers intended to deceive anyone from
the start. Pacific Northwest Skeptics investigated the
Spark Plug Collectors of America. The group formed in 1975,
well after the discovery of the artifact, and none of the
three discoverers was ever affiliated in any way that the
collectors can recall. Windham and Bond insist that while
spark plug collectors enjoy hoaxing one another, they
cannot imagine that any of their members would take a prank
this far.

Comparisons and Analysis

On September 14, 1999, Stromberg received a package from
Chad Windham. Inside the package were the two spark plugs
Windham had promised along with an analysis of the
specimens. Windham writes:

I am enclosing two spark plugs made by Champion Spark
Plug company circa - 1920's. Plug #1 is 7/8" - 18 thread. I
have loosely assembled the plug, and chipped the "brass
hat" off to show the configuration of it and the porcelain
under it. Plug #2 is 1/2" NPT - of same design.

The diameter of the porcelain on Plug #1 is slightly
less than 3/4" - close to the dimension in your letter. As
you can see the base and packing nut which hold the
porcelain, are sealed with a copper and asbestos
gasket. This corresponds with the article. The center
electrode of plugs were made of special alloys which may
support "...cut in two in 1961 but five years afterwards
had no tarnishing visible."

The sketches included clearly show one rib on the upper
end of the porcelain, although Champion used two ribs in
this era - probably just an artist's error. The "top hat matches those of
"plug 1 and 2."

As for the outer shell, it obviously decayed - probably
from salt water (or other corrosive substance) and the
outer crust is merely some sort of deposit like sea shells
or other deposits collected on the deteriorating surfaces
of the spark plug base.

There is NO doubt that this is merely an old spark
plug. Most probably, it is a Champion spark plug, similar
to the two enclosed.

Figure 5
Analysis of the original Coso Artifact X-ray.

Windham's letter did indeed match a careful analysis of the
specimens. Most striking is the brass "top hat" that has so
vexed previous attempts to provide a rational explanation
for the artifact. But the similarities are more than skin
deep. Because Windham had chipped the brass top hat off
specimen #1, the spark plug revealed a metal shaft
terminating in a flared end, presumably to help secure the
top hat to the plug's porcelain cylinder. This revelation
led to speculation that such a flared tip could also be
visible in the original X-ray of the brass hat. And indeed,
as shown at left, the flared end of the metal shaft also
appears in the Coso Artifact. The shaft in the X-ray, just
below the flare, also reveals deterioration until it meets
the porcelain cylinder. This, too, is exactly what we would
expect if the artifact is a 1920s-era Champion spark plug.
An X ray of the authors' own disassembled specimen reveals
a picture very similar to the original X-ray of the Coso
Artifact. As with the original artifact, the central metal
shaft of both specimens responds to a magnet.

Figure 6
Copper ring from 1920s Champion spark plug.

Proponents of fantastic stories regarding the artifact
have made mention of mysterious copper rings that encase
the porcelain. But this too can be easily explained.
Specimen #1 provided by Chad Windham was completely
disassembled, revealing a pair of copper rings sandwiching
an asbestos lining (right). According to Windham, this
design was necessary because porcelain and steel have
vastly differing expansion rates, so the copper was used
for compensation purposes.

Specimen #2 was not disassembled by Windham, but also
presented a feature that could explain why the artifact had
not been identified decades ago. Specimen #2, though
suffering from severe tarnish, came with a top nut screwed into its top
hat. Almost all Champion spark plug advertisements of
the first half of the twentieth century showed pictures of
their spark plugs including the top nut already screwed
into place. In some cases, the top nut comes in two forms,
one of which closely mimics the tip of today's contemporary
spark plugs, which have no threading whatsoever. So it
becomes rather easy to understand why the appearance of
threads in the Coso Artifact seemed so puzzling to the
original investigators.

Spark plug collectors are quite familiar with spark
plugs that have been found in unusual places. The Summer
1998 issue of "The Igniter," published by the Spark Plug
Collectors of America, features such an item on page 20.
Collector Joe Cook recounted, "Once while scuba diving, a
friend of mine made a rare discovery with his underwater
metal detector. It looks like a ball of barnacles and
shells, but has a spark plug top sticking out of it.
Apparently this plug has been under water for quite some
time! He asked me if I still collected plugs. I said yes
and then he asked me if I ever heard of a 'King Neptune'
special. I said no and headed for the 'Master list' to look
it up. When I couldn't find a 'King Neptune' special he
began to laugh and handed me the barnacle covered plug and he
said 'bet you don't have one like this.' He was right!"

Figure 7
The top half of a 1920s Champion spark plug - minus the
brass hat.

It should be noted that the corrosion of the Coso Artifact
almost completely destroyed any of the iron-alloy-based
components, with the exception of the metal shaft encased
in the porcelain cylinder. The samples received from Chad
Windham also revealed corrosion of the iron-based
components, but the brass top hats were unscathed, with the
exception of some tarnishing. If the Coso Artifact is
indeed a 1920s-era Champion spark plug, the X-ray of an
almost perfectly preserved top hat is exactly what one
would expect. Brass, a copper-zinc alloy is commonly
engineered to resist corrosion far better than iron-based
alloys. In harsh environments, copper tends to outlast
iron, but still succumbs fairly quickly. The rates of decay
in the Coso Artifact match the rates of decay one would see
in a 1920's era Champion spark plug. For an excellent
review of how ferrous and non-ferrous alloys decay over
time, please see "The Elements of Archaeological
Conservation" by J.M. Cronyn. This article includes
numerous photographs, including X-rays, of contemporary
objects that have completely decayed into oxide nodules.
Like the Coso Artifact, these examples also feature empty
cavities where the original materials once resided.
Examples include X-rays of a nodule containing the
perfectly preserved shape of a bolt, plating on a padlock
(including its internal workings), and a belt buckle.

The formation of the iron oxide nodule likely was
hastened by the fact that corrosive "mineral dust" is blown
off of the dry lake bed of Lake Owen and onto the
surrounding uplands where the artifact was discovered.
Salts created by the evaporation of the lake water is
regularly blown off of the lake bed by local windstorms.
The U.S. Geological Survey has conducted extensive
investigations of this phenomena (Source
http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/sw/impacts/geology/owens/
May 31, 2000).

Finally, as noted earlier, the last known individual in
possession of the artifact was Wallace Lane, who was
offering it for sale for $25,000. Bill Bond, a spark plug
museum curator was asked how much a 1920s-era Champion
spark plug would be worth today. His answer was, "A couple
o' bucks. Max."

Reaction from the Paranormal
Community

During the course of research, the authors of this paper
asked Dr. Chittick why he felt the Coso Artifact was an
object worthy of presentation to the public. Dr. Chittick
was specifically asked how he reconciled a previous age
estimate of 500,000 years with his young-earth creationist
beliefs. On September 29, 1999 Chittick responded:

The article's speculation that it had taken at least
500,000 years to attain the present form is just that:
speculation. Actual petrification of such objects proceeds
normally quite rapidly, as is illustrated by several other
similar formations. See for instance, the note about the
petrified miner's hat on the back cover of Creation Ex
Nihilo (Vol. 17, No. 3) for June-August, 1995. See also an
article about another "fossil" spark plug in Creation Ex
Nihilo (Vol. 21, No. 4) for September-November, 1999 on
page 6.

You asked what I thought about its age. My best guess is
that it is probably early post-Flood. I have not yet been
able to obtain sufficient documentation, so I don't say
much publicly. However, there is evidence that they did in
fact perhaps have internal combustion engines or even jet
engines way back then.

Dr. Chittick's revelation that he was already aware of
"fossil" spark plugs was startling. Dr. Chittick was asked
in a follow-up letter about how he can positively date the
Coso Artifact to the Great Flood since he was already aware
of contemporary spark plugs that appear to be fossilized.
In his response on October 23, 1999, he commented:

It has not been my privilege to personally examine the
Coso artifact or location and strata where it was found.
There are two reasons I considered the artifact
significant.

1. It obviously is a man-made item.

2. Those who evaluated the strata said that it appeared
to be old, not modern strata. Those two items are the
principle basis for my conclusion that it was worth study.
Certainly it does merit further study in my judgment.
Numerous items like that abound, but I haven't been able to
document them as thoroughly as I would like, and so I don't
say too much about them.

As noted earlier, the alleged strata where the Coso
Artifact was found is unknown since all three discoverers
had separately searched for geodes all morning before
consolidating their collections in a single sack. Even if
the exact location was discovered, the artifact was an
oxide nodule freely laying on the surface, so the strata
where the item was discovered is irrelevant.

Once the investigation revealed beyond a reasonable
doubt the true origins of the artifact, Dr. Chittick was
informed by Pierre Stromberg via postal mail. Dr. Chittick
was warned about the publication of this paper, and was
urged to issue a preemptive retraction as well as paste a
disclaimer in his book detailing the Coso Artifact story as
fallacious. Dr. Chittick never responded and may be still
promoting a 1920s-era Champion spark plug as evidence of
advanced technology of the ancient past.

Ken Clark of Spokane's Creation Outreach at first
expressed interest in the new discoveries. But when he
learned that the true identity was a 1920s-era Champion
spark plug and was offered detailed proof, he no longer
communicated with the authors of this article. As of May 7,
2000, Creation Outreach continues to promote the spark plug
on their website as evidence of a technologically advanced
ancient civilization.

Conclusion

Figure 8
A Ford Model T. 1920s Champion spark plugs were widely used
in this vehicle.

The Coso Artifact is a remarkable example of how
creation "science" fails when the assumptions of its theory
are implemented in a real life archaeological situation.
Young-earth creationists commonly assume that almost all
sedimentary layers were deposited during the Great Flood.
Therefore, any items closely associated with such strata
must date back to the time of Noah.

Perhaps the most surprising revelation is the stunningly
poor research Dr. Chittick conducted regarding the
artifact. Several times he referenced creationist articles
that should have cast the original claims in extreme doubt.
But somehow, he continued to be fascinated by the artifact.
Anti-creationists familiar with Dr. Chittick will remember
a previous incident with Dr. Chittick. When confronted
about his fallacious statements by Jim Lippard regarding Lucy's knee joint in the
mid 1990s, he ignored these warnings and continued to
mislead his audiences until confronted in person by Pierre
Stromberg at the conclusion of a lecture in Seattle. It is
possible that Dr. Chittick could be still promoting the
Coso Artifact both in lectures and in his book without
acknowledging any of his private conversations with the
authors of this article.

The Coso Artifact was indeed a remarkable device. It was
a 1920s-era Champion spark plug that likely powered a Ford
Model T or Model A engine, modified to possibly serve
mining operations in the Coso mountain range of California.
To suggest that it was a device belonging to an advanced
ancient civilization of the past could be interpreted as
true, but is an exaggeration of several thousand years.

Other Contacts

About the
Authors

Pierre Stromberg is the founder of
Pacific Northwest Skeptics and has been fascinated by
origins research ever since he saw PBS Nova's destructive
expose of Erich Von Daniken's "Chariots of the Gods?"
decades ago. Since then, he has encouraged a grassroots
movement to combat creationism in the Pacific Northwest.
When he isn't battling creationists, Pierre enjoys hearing
stories about local hauntings, alien abductions, and UFO
sightings. Pierre Stromberg has a B.S. (Manhattan College)
in Computer Science and is currently employed as a software
quality assurance manager in Redmond, Washington.

Paul V. Heinrich is a geologist and
Research Associate at Louisiana State University. He has a
B.S. (Louisiana State Univ.) and M.S. (Univ. of Illinois)
in geology and over 13 years experience as a geologist. His
work experience includes years of research in Quaternary
geology, geologic mapping, and archaeological geology. He
is a registered professional geologist in Tennessee (#1373)
and Arkansas (#1710). He has been interested in the
"Wildside of Geoarchaeology" since watching the "Mysterious
Origins of Man" in 1996.